Registration Of Side By Sides In Nevada

[SandBlasted]

I talked with Senator Hardy last week and the lawyers from the DMV will not budge on the liability issue for the state on the registration issue.

I countered every issue the DMV brought up but was not able to overcome this issue. Yes people, the litigators rule the world. Rest assured fellow citizens; your freedom is alive and well in Nevada as long as there is no chance the state can be sued.

The DMV states it will register side by sides and golf carts, if they are done by a manufacture. This requires a new MSO on the vehicles with modifications to meet FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) This transfers liability from the state to the manufacture. (I can't find any info if the state has ever been sued)

We (Extreme Outdoors) are looking into becoming a manufacture. We do know there is a less burden at the federal level for vehicle manufactures who produce in small numbers, but the states requires bonds and a whole bunch of hoops to jump through. We are proceeding on this course at this time.

The federal government views the owner of a owner modified vehicle, as the manufacture. I tried to get the law changed that would reflect that a owner of a modified vehicle is the manufacture and the owner as a manufacture is liable to meet FMVSS. It fell to deaf ears at the DMV.

We don't trust the DMV, as it was they who told us to get a law passed, then fought it every step of the way. It was the DMV who has stated you can't do it as federal laws do not allow it, and that was false. We are worried that after we spend the money to become a manufacture the DMV will still deny our registrations.

I really don't know how hard Senator Hardy pushed this issue, but he is a friend to the off-roader in this state, one of the few. If you are so inclined, give him a call letting him know you appreciate his efforts.

Edited April 21, 2009 by SandBlasted

[White Rhino]

Thanks for your efforts Craig

I was hoping for a different outcome, but let me know if you become a manuf. I am assuming you would take an existing Rhino and modify to meet the law?

Thanks again

Paul

[SandBlasted]

Thanks for your efforts Craig

I was hoping for a different outcome, but let me know if you become a manuf. I am assuming you would take an existing Rhino and modify to meet the law?

Thanks again

Paul

The easiest way is to make them street legal is to make them a LSV (low speed vehicle) For the Rhino it requires a new CDI, with a top speed of 25mph. A Lexan windshield (Meets AS-5 glazing standards) Type 1 or 2 seat belt assemblies, then the normal stuff like horn, turn signals etc. For LSV's the normal FMVSS are pretty simple to meet, with greatly reduced standards over a normal passenger vehicle.

Other side by sides do not use the MPH vehicle speed limiter like the Rhino, only a RPM limiter so we have not investigated how we can legally limit the speeds.

The feds say the way we are doing it for the Rhino is legal, as it would require the owner to change out the CDI for higher speeds, but for side by sides like the Ranger or RZR we would have to see how we can modify it so it can't be changed super easy.

A block of wood under the gas pedal for example or a simple governor will not suffice. It is noted however, it is not illegal under federal law for an owner to modify his vehicle. You can cut the seat belts out of your car, disable every safety device in it, and it is not against FEDERAL LAW. However if your pulled over by a LEO that is a different story.

As long as it leaves our state of the art manufacturing facility in full compliance, you can put back in the old CDI, just don't get busted doing over 25 MPH

We will be looking at the laws and seeing if we can manufacture these vehicles to be regular passenger vehicles as well. I'm sure these will require more DOT items installed, like windshield wipers DOT Tires, emmission standards etc.

Edited April 21, 2009 by SandBlasted

[Vegas FX400]

Thanks for all you have done. They are a bunch of friggin idiots. Guess they didnt want anymore $$$ for the state from registration. I guess im gonna move to AZ, where you can drive them on ANY street.

[mineurbiz]

Thanks for your efforts!!!

I don't get how AZ did this and they are not slow moving?

[dunefreak]

That's a real bummer Craig. You've put lots of effort into this too.

[Bryan M]

Craig, thanks for all your hardwork on this....hope you can still pull something off.

On another note Im thinking of reg. mine to my brianhead address and getting the plate and then driving it here and if I get pulled over by tha man then just have reg. and ins. papers ready and use the federal law that says all states have to honor other states reg. policies.....think it would work? why not?

[SandBlasted]

Craig, thanks for all your hardwork on this....hope you can still pull something off.

On another note Im thinking of reg. mine to my brianhead address and getting the plate and then driving it here and if I get pulled over by tha man then just have reg. and ins. papers ready and use the federal law that says all states have to honor other states reg. policies.....think it would work? why not?

As long as it is legally tied to Utah and leaves the state every 60 days, I don't see why not. Now the cops may say different, but I know there are ways to get it done. The key is legally tied and Nevada laws on registration. Problem with Utah, it MAY be a restrictive plate. AZ changed some of its laws this year and I don't know what those implications are if any.

I have been thinking of getting it registered in AZ, having it titled to a relative who lives in that state, and I'm "just borrowing it" or I'm the lein holder and both of us are the registered owner.

Some other factors I've thought of. If you have a wife that does not work, have her legal address in Utah or AZ and driver license from one of those states.

A LLC in another state and it registered to the LLC.

Same with a trust.

I have a friend for years that has every vehicle he owns as well as most of his children’s vehicles registered in OR. They have property in OR, and she is a legal resident of OR. The local cops who know everyone lives here in Boulder ticketed them a few times, but it was thrown out every time.

Be sure what tax obligations you may incur with these options.

Since I have not been given a fair hearing on this issue and there is no one who will make sure I get a fair hearing, I reserve the right to protest in any legal way I see fit. If it is not giving Nevada it's fair share of tax revenue from my registration and it can be legally done, then so be it.

[Dunerocket]

Craig, thanks for all your hardwork on this....hope you can still pull something off.

On another note Im thinking of reg. mine to my brianhead address and getting the plate and then driving it here and if I get pulled over by tha man then just have reg. and ins. papers ready and use the federal law that says all states have to honor other states reg. policies.....think it would work? why not?

I don't know if that would work either, we were in Caliente last year and there was a guy that had a Rhino with plates from CA. It had turn signals windshield everything, I believe he was pulled over and told not to drive on the street anymore.

[SandBlasted]

I don't know if that would work either, we were in Caliente last year and there was a guy that had a Rhino with plates from CA. It had turn signals windshield everything, I believe he was pulled over and told not to drive on the street anymore.

I did talk to a lawyer on this and he said it was legal under the comity clause of the constitution. I asked can you give me an example? Say if Nevada's legal age driving age is 17 and in AZ it is 16. Nevada can't ticket a 16 year old for driving in the state of Nevada. Take that for what it is worth.

Cops don't know screwy things like the comity clause. Every cop I have ever show Nevada's law and the federal law on LSV's said it looked like it was legal to them as well as the regular DMV employees.

Our own police chief from BC is on record saying there is nothing he can do about it.

Having said that I would have politely told the cop I will remove it from the street and asked him for the ticket and let a judge decide. As long as residency requirements are met, who knows.

I have had many 3rd party’s say even regular ATV's (4x4s) with plates in AZ have been given a pass from the CA highway patrol. They looked at the equipment, registration and insurance and said have a nice day.

Edited April 25, 2009 by SandBlasted

[SandBlasted]

I received this from M. Forese at the DMV today.

Mr. Castleberry,

With the September 26, 2008 ruling from NHTSA that was sent to you that will not allow a vehicle to be governed down to create a LSV, what you are wanting to do would not meet federal standards. Therefore, the DMV stands by the decision that you will need to become a manufacturer and registered as a manufacturer with NHTSA and EPA. Your status with NHTSA and EPA would have to be as a manufacturer for on road vehicles. This way you can label your vehicles as a manufacturer and assume the liability. Becoming a rebuilder would not allow you to re-manufacture a vehicle. Once you have become a manufacture with NHTSA and EPA you can apply with the Department as the same type of manufacturer you are approved as via NHTSA/EPA. The DMV considers this matter closed.

Mark Froese, CPM

Administrator

Research & Development

NV DMV

My Reply

Thank you for your response Mr. Froese.

See below for current clarification from the Coleman Sachs, where the buck stops at the NHTSA. I did not send this to you, as I gave it to Senator Hardy. Maybe you did not receive it.

The DMV may consider this matter closed, however I do not. Like so many other things you have said that were in error, I did get that ruling and like all the rest you’ve sent I researched it out for myself. I told you I talked VIA phone to a compliance officer at the NHTSA and discussed how I was going to do the Rhino. While a simple governor or a “block of wood under the gas pedal” would not suffice, we have a electronic speed controller that “can’t be readily modified by the owner” which is the standard. If you have been working with me instead of against me, maybe you would of remembered that. Rest assured before I do become a manufacture I will get the speed controller clarified again just like everything else I’ve done.

I already have a call into the EPA to see if there is any emissions standards for LSV’s. Since Nevada does not require emissions testing for motorcycle engines and the Rhino engine is basically the same thing, can I assume Nevada will not require a smog test for our LSV’s? Or is this something you are going to spring on me later?

The compliance officer stated the way I was doing the speed control would be legal. The Rhino is the only side by side, designed to run faster than 25MPH that can and is controlled by a electronic vehicle speed limiter (Not a RPM Limiter) where the rest of the side by sides designed to go faster than 25 MHP (to my best knowledge) can’t be controlled the same way as the Rhino. It was noted by the compliance officer, that the GEM car is capable of speeds faster than 25mph if the speed controller is modified or even tires, so in fact the GEM car is itself being “governed down” and kits are sold on the web for such modifications. Depending on what kit is sold, speeds are advertised for a modified GEM car of over 45MPH.

Previous so called rulings you’ve sent me were also found to be in error. Like a owner modifier is automatically considered the manufacture from the NHTSA. Like under federal law you can convert a off-road vehicle into an on-road vehicle, can’t be a LSV with a truck bed, or you don’t register off–road vehicles. I can’t figure out if you’re really incompetent or just trying to screw this up, but I’m about ready to make a formal complaint. Maybe you’re not used to having someone disagree with you, I don’t know what the problem is but I can tell you, you don’t work well with others. I have just a high school education yet I seem to be able to perform better research than you on the subject at hand.

You told me you don’t register off-road vehicles which is not true and I’m pretty sure you know it. If not you need to get into the loop. It seems late last year you stopped the practice, however many DMV employees did not get that memo.

I have been doing research on the registered off road vehicles which I have stated for several years that the DMV does. I talked to an DMV inspector, several owners, and industry manufactures of dual sport kits and it is noted that registration became difficult late last year. I assume this was suddenly stopped because of my insistence that the DMV does register off road vehicles.

One owner had his Yamaha WR450 which carries the same “not for on road use” warnings, registered by the state in August 2008. When I talked to Baja Designs, a manufacture of DOT dual sport kits for off road motorcycles they said they started hearing through their customers that Nevada was not registering them “around the 1st of the year, 2008-2009.” The DMV inspectors time line thought it was late 2008 Nevada put a stop to the practice.

It is also noted that when I called the other day to the Las Vegas DMV, depending on who you talked to, some said it was legal. At one time it was so prevalent and easy to register these off road vehicles, Californians were registering them in Nevada and then taking them back to other more restrictive states like California, and since it was registered in Nevada, California would issue a registration.

Since I have been asking for registration for a couple of years now, it is noted that everything you told me from we don’t register off road vehicles to federal law does not allow conversion has been false and in fact WAS legal from the standpoint of off road modification and registration of converted dirt bikes. Since our Rhino met FMVSS and you were registering off road vehicles, my request should have been granted.

If the DMV is now going to stop registration of Dual Sport MC conversions, DMV officials should inform the policy to all of its employees and update and make it clear on its website what that policy is. Residents who view the DMV web site, talk to DMV employees and other residents who have successfully registered their own, these residents may purchase these expensive kits having received incorrect information from the DMV itself, wasting their hard earned money in the process.

This is in fact what happened to myself. When I gave DMV employees the info what I was going to do with the Rhino, showed them the law about Low Speed Vehicles, I was informed I could do it. The DMV is a lot like the IRS, talk to 3 different people, get 3 different answers.

It will be my intention if I become a manufacture, to re-manufacture so owners can register golf carts, certain Side by Sides and dual sport motorcycles. If you have objections to this I insist on having all of your objections backed in law or regulation before I begin. Coleman Sachs would be a good place for correct information at the federal level. I also wondering why you have not sent the research information you said you were going to send? Did you forget? I also now want any legal opinions from the DMV lawyers or state lawyers on this liability issue. I also want to know how the state liability differs from what I’m trying to do and with kit and home built vehicles.

I ask that the DMV start working like the Governors banner that reads "The people of the state of Nevada deserve a government that works for them, not against them." Never once have I felt you have worked with me.

I know there is a legal way for you to register my Rhino as a LSV without me becoming a manufacture. Please work for me, not against me. I would suggest maybe registration as a home built.

Dear Mr. Castleberry,

Thank you for referring these questions to us. As discussed in the excerpt from the Federal Register document that you provided, we do take the position that a person who converts an off-road vehicle into an on-road vehicle takes on the responsibility of a motor vehicle manufacturer, and, as such, must certify the resulting motor vehicle as complying with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS). We do not approve or certify any motor vehicle as complying with all applicable FMVSS. That is instead the responsibility of the vehicle's manufacturer. A manufacturer certifies a vehicle by permanently affixing to the vehicle, in a prescribed location, a label that, among other things, identifies the manufacturer and the vehicle's date of manufacturer, and states that the vehicle complies with all applicable FMVSS in effect on that date. In the scenario you describe, the person who converts a golf car into an LSV would be responsible for affixing such a certification label to the vehicle. That person would not need to submit any information concerning the vehicle to NHTSA. Instead, the mere act of affixing the label constitutes the manufacturer's certification that the vehicle complies with all applicable FMVSS. You should understand that a manufacturer must exercise reasonable care in certifying a vehicle to all applicable FMVSS. If NHTSA should learn that a vehicle certified to our standards in fact does not comply with one or more of those standards, we could ask the manufacturer to demonstrate how it exercised reasonable care in certifying the vehicle. If the manufacturer fails to establish that it in fact exercised reasonable care, it could be subject to civil penalties. You should understand that these provisions are primarily applied to commercial entities that manufacture motor vehicles for resale, and not to consumers who manufacture a motor vehicle for their own use.

Coleman Sachs, Chief

Import and Certification Division

Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance

Mr. Froese, If you don’t understand what Mr. Sachs wrote here, or what I have written, by all means, please call and I will be more than happy to explain it to you.

Thank you,

Craig Castleberry

Edited April 25, 2009 by SandBlasted

[Vegas FX400]

Again, thank you for all that you are doing.

[foolofsand]

hope you can get something on because just returned from the arizona strip. starting July1, all vehicles will have to be street licensed that go into the strip. quads, mc, and sxs will have to be street licensed. this is assine of course, since no nevada and most utah atv cant go there anymore. utah is moving forward with their licensing now also. this law in ariz has been around, now they will be enforcing it. it applies to ALL roads in arizona that are city, county or state maintained. this will apply to about all off-road roads also. arizona residents are ok, we will be screwed and not allowed to ride in arizona.

I really dont know what nv problem is, since ariz, utah, idaho and cal are moving in that direction on atvs? the dmv is being lazy and not wanting to do any such thing. it will take legislation, as the other states have done, not cooperation with the dmv. dmv are ignorant and complete morons to deal with. the ONLY way is to bypass the dmv and just make them do what the law says, so legislation is needed and only takes 1 rep or senator to get it done. no reason why nv cant follow utah or ariz laws. are we morons in nv? guess so.

we tried this a few years ago with just registration and all the groups couldnt even get together for that, and then the greenies started adding crap to the bill and we just dropped it.

we just need to sell everything and watch tv like pelosi, obama and reid want.

[SandBlasted]

:dumbass: Again, thank you for all that you are doing.

No thanks are required. All the help you and others have done is more than enough thanks. You Rock!

[vegas style]

to revive a old topic

i wonder if this new registration law is a step in the right direction. sure would be nice to have the same law as arizona.

[JoeDuner]

whats the new law Steve?

[vegas style]

about nevada registering and titling off road vehicles again

[mush]

man that would be sweet but ummm doubt it.